This was long overdue, and I should have made it per day when the supreme court did these cases. But oh well, it’s all under one megathread. This will be active for a couple of days.

  • @Eclipciz
    link
    101 year ago

    Can someone TLDR the LGBT case? I heard something about legal business discrimination but that’s all I know.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      351 year ago

      A Christian website designer sued so she wouldn’t have to make sites for LGBTQ+ weddings. The court said she can refuse, citing religious freedom. It was a 6-3 vote.

      Also, it seems the web designer that sued basically made it all up. The designer didn’t have any same-sex clients. She didn’t receive any requests from gay couples to work on their wedding websites. But it doesn’t matter the court ruled that she can legally discriminate anyway.

      • Fugicara
        link
        271 year ago

        She was also not a web designer lol. Insane ruling by the SCOTUS, totally ignoring standing. Same issue with the student debt relief overturning. This court does not care about standing at all and is willing to throw out that most basic principle of law for the purpose of their judicial activism.

      • @Gullible
        link
        121 year ago

        This may create a sort of pseudoreligious legal arms race. One group will arbitrarily take away rights based on “their religion,” as has happened today, and another will attempt to recreate those rights under their own “religious” banner, as the church of satan has attempted. “Religion” will end up a focal point, regardless of the outcome, and fundamentalists win.

        • @Marmotter
          link
          91 year ago

          I have a feeling that if the church of Satan or whatever tried pushing a case under the banner of religious freedom, this court would just introduce some litmus test for which religions and believers qualify for protection under law and which do not (using originalism as a shield). And if that were to happen, I think we can confidently say that they’d find some way to implement a test that discriminated against minority beliefs in the US (e.g Islam, Hindu, atheism, indigenous faiths, etc.), further codifying the erosion of constitutional protections. I dunno, I’m obviously not a legal scholar, but I think this court is getting pretty easy to predict at this point.

          • outrageousmatterOPM
            link
            3
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            True, I don’t think the church of satan is that strong. The satanic temple on the other hand is a power house of fucking states over adding moses and some statue. Say a city builds a statue of jesus, they must allow a statue of satan since they are opening a religious form. If satan is rejected well, under the constitution they are violating religious freedom and they either must accept the state of satan or take down the statue of jesus.

      • @YoBuckStopsHere
        link
        81 year ago

        Which confirms that states can pose Jim Crow style laws against LGBTQ.

    • @SulaymanF
      link
      81 year ago

      A website designer refused to make a website for a gay wedding couple, citing that homosexual relationship are against their religious beliefs. The state had laws forbidding discrimination on the basis of sexuality and in a lawsuit tried to force the designer to make the website. The Supreme Court decided 6-3 that religious beliefs are more important and the state can’t force someone do do business against their religious beliefs and that doing so would be a violation of free speech by forcing someone to make speech.

      • Mister_Haste
        link
        fedilink
        141 year ago

        It’s important to point out that the entire story behind the case was fabricated. There was no gay couple asking for anything. It was all garbage used to erode LGBTQ+ rights.

      • BeautifulMind ♾️
        link
        21 year ago

        This whole case has me asking questions- who hires a web designer to build them a website for their wedding? People with an extra few grand sitting around on top of the costs of having a wedding? I’m going with: nobody. Nobody makes a website for their wedding when they could just post about it on social media for free.

        This is the stupidest timeline.

        • @SulaymanF
          link
          21 year ago

          I’ve been to at least 3 weddings with a website. They have an RSVP page, a registry, a guestbook, and photo albums and friends/family can add to the album.